DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 4-7, 9, 14, 16-17 and 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luh (US 2019/0090670A1—previously cited) in view of Cho (US 2004/0145200 A1—previously cited).
Regarding claim 1, Luh discloses an ergonomic medical instrument (Figs, 7-17, and 23A-24D; para. [0049]) comprising: (a) a first support unit 120A (Figs. 24A-24D; para. [0049]) comprising a first horn and a second horn, the first horn and second horn separated by a central ridge (Fig. 7 reproduced below); and (b) a second support unit 120B shaped to support a thumb of a user (Figs. 24A-24D; para. [0049]) and wherein the first support unit and second support unit are configured to reduce effort required to manipulate the ergonomic medical instrument (para. [0056]), (i.e., the broadest reasonable definition of horn according to Merriam Webster is a protuberance or projection; since 120A projects laterally from 100, the first support unit is a horn such that a finger can be accommodated through the loop of the horn (i.e., Merriam Webster also discloses that horns are hollow), see also para. [0053] that discloses that the finger grip may be a C-shape and as such is not a full loop), and wherein the second support unit comprises at least one horn (i.e., the broadest reasonable definition of horn according to Merriam Webster is a protuberance or projection; since 120B extends out laterally from 100, the second support unit is a horn such that a finger can be accommodated through the loop of the horn (i.e., Merriam Webster also discloses that horns are hollow)).
PNG
media_image1.png
510
658
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Luh also discloses that the finger grips are adjustable (para. [0048]) and removable (para. [0055]), however Luh does not directly disclose that the first and second support units are slidably removable.
In the same field of endeavor, namely tweezers, Cho discloses that the first and second support units 3 are slidably removable (paras. [0021], [0026]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Luh to have the first and second support units slidably removable as taught by Cho for the purpose of easily replacing the finger grips when they get worn or dirty (para. [0026]).
Regarding claim 4, Luh and Cho disclose the ergonomic medical instrument of claim 1. Luh also discloses: the first support unit and the second support unit each comprise an instrument engaging portion (i.e., at 121A and 121B) for engagement with an arm of the ergonomic medical instrument (Fig. 14).
Regarding claim 5, Luh and Cho disclose the ergonomic medical instrument of claim 4. Luh also discloses: the instrument engaging portion defines a wholly or partially enclosed lumen (i.e., Fig. 15 shows a partially enclosed lumen between the swivel mounts 121 and the finger grips 120), wherein the arm of the ergonomic medical instrument is inserted into the lumen (i.e., Fig. 15 shows the arms 182A, 182B extending all the way through the lumen created between the swivel mounts and the finger grips; see also para. [0071]).
Regarding claim 6, Luh and Cho disclose the ergonomic medical instrument of claim 4. Luh also discloses: the instrument engaging portion is a clip (i.e., clip is defined as an object used for fastening things together, also defined as a clamp or clasp; Figs. 7-17; para. [0049], para. [0071]).
Regarding claim 7, Luh and Cho disclose the ergonomic medical instrument of claim 1. Luh also discloses: the first support unit comprises: (a) a first curve in the first horn (i.e., left curve of 120A) defining a first seat for supporting a first finger of the user (Fig. 7; para. [0049]); and (b) a second curve in the second horn (i.e., right curve of 120A) defining a second seat for supporting a second finger of the user (Fig. 7; para. [0049]).
Regarding claim 9, Luh and Cho disclose the ergonomic medical instrument of claim 1. Luh also discloses: the second support unit comprises a curve defining a seat for supporting the thumb of the user (Figs. 7-9; para. [0046]).
Regarding claim 14, Luh discloses a set of support units 120A, 120B for a medical instrument comprising: (a) a first support unit 120A shaped to support at least one finger of a user (Figs. 7-17, para. [0049]), the first support unit comprising a first instrument engaging portion 121A configured to be engaged with a first arm of the medical instrument (Fig. 14) and (b) a second support unit 120B shaped to support a thumb of a user (Figs. 7-17, para. [0049]), the second support unit comprising a second instrument engaging portion 121B configured to be engaged with a second arm of the medical instrument (Fig. 14), wherein the first support unit comprises two horns and a central ridge disposed between the two horns (i.e., see Fig. 7 reproduced above), the central ridge comprising one or more grooves (i.e., see Fig. 7 reproduced above, the central ridge comprises one groove; also, the broadest reasonable definition of horn according to Merriam Webster is a protuberance or projection; since 120A projects laterally from 100, the first support unit is a horn such that a finger can be accommodated through the loop of the horn (i.e., Merriam Webster also discloses that horns are hollow)), and wherein the second support unit comprises at least one horn (i.e., the broadest reasonable definition of horn according to Merriam Webster is a protuberance or projection; since 120B projects laterally from 100, the second support unit is a horn such that a finger can be accommodated through the loop of the horn (i.e., Merriam Webster also discloses that horns are hollow)).
Luh also discloses that the finger grips are adjustable (para. [0048]) and removable (para. [0055]), however Luh does not directly disclose that the first support unit is configured to be slidably removable from the first arm of the medical instrument and the second support unit is configured to be slidably removable from the second arms of the medical instrument.
In the same field of endeavor, namely tweezers, Cho discloses that the first support unit 3 is configured to be slidably removable from the first arm of the medical instrument (paras. [0021], [0026]) and the second support unit 3 is configured to be slidably removable from the second arms of the medical instrument. (paras. [0021], [0026]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Luh to have the first and second support units slidably removable as taught by Cho for the purpose of easily replacing the finger grips when they get worn or dirty (para. [0026]).
Regarding claim 16, Luh and Cho disclose the support units of claim 14. Luh also discloses: the first support unit comprises two curves defining two seats (Figs. 7-17) and wherein the second support unit comprises one curve defining one seat (Figs. 7-17).
Regarding claim 17, Luh and Cho disclose the support units of claim 14. Luh also discloses: the first instrument engaging portion is a clip (i.e., clip is defined as an object used for fastening things together, also defined as a clamp or clasp) and wherein the second engagement portion is a clip (para. [0071]).
Regarding claim 20, Luh discloses a set of ergonomic medical instrument supports 120A, 120B comprising: (a) a first support unit 120A (i.e., the broadest reasonable definition of horn according to Merriam Webster is a protuberance or projection; since 120A projects laterally from 100, the first support unit is a horn such that a finger can be accommodated through the loop of the horn (i.e., Merriam Webster also discloses that horns are hollow)) comprising: (i) a first horn comprising a first curve (Fig. 7 reproduced above), the first curve defining a first seat (see Fig. 15 reproduced below); (ii) a second horn comprising a second curve (Fig. 7 reproduced above), the second curve defining a second seat (see Fig. 15 reproduced below); (iii) a first ridge 183A disposed between the first curve and the second curve (i.e., Fig. 15 shows the first ridge being in the middle of 120A such that it is between the first curve and the second curve in the longitudinal direction); and (iv) a first instrument engaging portion 121A shaped for engagement with a first arm of an instrument (Figs. 7-17; para. [0049]) and (b) a second support unit 120B (i.e., the broadest reasonable definition of horn according to Merriam Webster is a protuberance or projection; since 120B projects laterally from 100, the second support unit is a horn such that a finger can be accommodated through the loop of the horn (i.e., Merriam Webster also discloses that horns are hollow)) comprising: (i) a thirdhorn and a firth horn, the third horn and the fourth horn (i.e., each protruding side) forming a curve defining a third seat (see Fig. 15 reproduced below); (ii) a second ridge 183B disposed centrally on the third curve (i.e., Fig. 15 shows the second ridge being in the middle of 120B thereby being disposed centrally on the curve); and (iii) a second instrument engaging portion 121B shaped for engagement with a second arm of the instrument (Figs. 7-17).
PNG
media_image2.png
627
644
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 21, Luh and Cho disclose the medical instrument of claim 1. Luh further discloses wherein the first horn and second horn are ambidextrous (i.e., at least because they are movable and rotatable (see for example paras [0049] and [0051]).
Regarding claim 22, Luh and Cho disclose the medical instrument of claim 14. Luh further discloses wherein the support units are ambidextrous (i.e., at least because they are movable and rotatable (see for example paras [0049] and [0051]).
Regarding claim 23, Luh and Cho disclose the medical instrument of claim 20. Luh further discloses wherein the set of ergonomic medical instrument supports are ambidextrous (i.e., at least because they are movable and rotatable (see for example paras [0049] and [0051]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luh and Cho as applied to claim 14 and further in view of Kienzle et al. (US 20120004685 A1—previously cited)
Regarding claim 19, Luh and Cho disclose the support units of claim 14. Luh also discloses: the medical instrument is forceps (Figs. 7-17). Luh and Cho fail to directly disclose that the forceps have exchangeable tips.
In the same field of endeavor, namely surgical instruments, Kienzle discloses: the medical instrument (Fig. 2) has exchangeable tips 15 or 16 (Fig. 2; para. [0029], [0034]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Luh and Cho to have the exchangeable tips of Kienzle for the purposes of using alternate tips at the treatment site (para. [0021]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 03, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the prior art fails to disclose the term “horn” in claims 1, 14, and 20. Examiner notes that Applicant has amended the specification to include in para. [0091] that horns do not fully form loops or rings. Examiner points to para. [0053] of Luh that discloses the finger grip may be in the shape of a “C-shaped ring” and have a “semi-circular shape” which would disclose a horn that does not fully form loops or rings. Further, the Applicant argues that the limitations relating to a central ridge between the curves are not disclosed in Luh. Examiner disagrees and notes that Merriam-Webster discloses a ridge as being an elevated structure. Examiner points that the raised region between the two horns as shown above with regard to Fig. 7 clearly shows a raised structure. Examiner also points out that Applicant’s specification discloses in para. [096] that the central ridge 26 is configured to provide a contact point for a user’s finger. Examiner notes that any raised surface would be interpreted as a ridge and further as shown in Fig. 7 above provides a contact point at least since each side of 120a creates a profile to accommodate a finger of a user and a contact point between them to support each finger.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHAEL LYNN GEIGER whose telephone number is (571)272-6196. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00am-5:00pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Darwin Erezo can be reached on 5712724695. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RACHAEL L GEIGER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3771
/BROOKE LABRANCHE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771